Popular Post 500cc Posted February 27, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 I do find it surprising that the FIM continue to get stick for their handling of this case. Whilst performance enhancing drugs and alcohol are different; one is cheating, the other dangerous, they are part of a single program. It is understandable that introducing different processes for each type of offence (the two I've named are just two ways to look at it) isn't realistic. Take the example of British 400m Hurdler Rhys Williams and consider the related timelines with Ward. He tested positive for drugs on 11th July 2014. He hearing was then delayed twice. First from end of October, than from early November. At the third attempt it was held on 15th December. Directly after the hearing the athletics media reported they wouldn't hear the outcome until January 2015. The decision was announced on 16th January 2015. Williams was judged to have unknowingly consumed contaminated supplements. He was banned for 4 months. So his he was actually suspended awaiting a hearing and decision for longer than his eventual ban. He missed captaining Wales at the Commonwealth Games as a result. However, it's worth noting he is quoted as saying: "However, I accept that responsibility for the supplements I take rests with me and I accept the four-month ban. I remain as committed to drug free athletics as ever." Perhaps Ward will be making a similar statement re the dangers of alcohol and motor sport ? So again, has the process been unfair on Ward who knowingly drunk excessive alcohol prior to the meeting? I see incredible similarities with how Williams case was handled. The structure of a sport (e.g. dates of season, qualification for the GP's etc) should not be a consideration in passing judgement. I've been very unimpressed by the response of the Speedway establishment on this, primarily in the UK. From those participating, officials and media, it has been outward looking at the audacity of the FIM interfering in their sport in such a bureaucratic way. Very much a 'Of course we don't agree with riding under the influence BUT .......". The right thing to do now is condemn Ward's actions, send out a stern warning to all riders, but don't hang Ward out to dry. He is being severely punished, but the authorities need to be backing that punishment, it's severe but not unnecessarily excessive. Bleating about the unfairness is not the way to go. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 The right thing to do now is condemn Ward's actions No, the right thing for the 'speedway establishment' to do is wait for the verdict as to whether he's actually guilty of not. If there was a flaw in the testing process, then cannot be conclusively proved he was over the limit the following day regardless of whether he'd had a beer or five the night before and he admitted it. Of course, the ridiculous rants of Muddlo are not helping matters, not least because he seems to be incriminating the bloke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillipsr Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 No, the right thing for the 'speedway establishment' to do is wait for the verdict as to whether he's actually guilty of not. If there was a flaw in the testing process, then cannot be conclusively proved he was over the limit the following day regardless of whether he'd had a beer or five the night before and he admitted it. Of course, the ridiculous rants of Muddlo are not helping matters, not least because he seems to be incriminating the bloke. The verdict was given yesterday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 No, the right thing for the 'speedway establishment' to do is wait for the verdict as to whether he's actually guilty of not. If there was a flaw in the testing process, then cannot be conclusively proved he was over the limit the following day regardless of whether he'd had a beer or five the night before and he admitted it.Of course, the ridiculous rants of Muddlo are not helping matters, not least because he seems to be incriminating the bloke. Er ... Where have you been for the last 24 hours? The verdict is in ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostwalker Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 No, the right thing for the 'speedway establishment' to do is wait for the verdict as to whether he's actually guilty of not. If there was a flaw in the testing process, then cannot be conclusively proved he was over the limit the following day regardless of whether he'd had a beer or five the night before and he admitted it. Of course, the ridiculous rants of Muddlo are not helping matters, not least because he seems to be incriminating the bloke. See this post: http://www.speedway-forum.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=77486&page=296&do=findComment&comment=2579720 As most of us already new there were no errors with testing or b-sample or anything like that. It was just lies from the Darcy camp. Just like they lied about expecting a ruling the week after the hearing when they actually knew and had been informed that the ruling could take up to 45 days. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
severnsider Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 No but if he forfeits the points, then he was paid points money for points he didn't score. The "prizes" part is irrelevant. Think the prize money may have been due to him finishing 2nd in the Polish League riders championship during the delayed suspension period Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theknow 2 Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Wonder if the aussies would stick up this much for a Brit ? Hopefully now all the Ward lovers can remove there heads from his backside and we can move on in 2015 Drank/ Banned/Proved Guilty/sentenced. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Wonder if the aussies would stick up this much for a Brit ? Hopefully now all the Ward lovers can remove there heads from his backside and we can move on in 2015 Drank/ Banned/Proved Guilty/sentenced. Absolutely no chance. They are more deluded than ever. Some now think the 10 month ban 'proves' that the test was faulty and he wasn't guilty.. they believe that he would have been banned for 2 years otherwise and it's only 10 months or they have 'their arses sued off'. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJK86 Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) Well now decision is in I hope Darcy has finally learnt his lesson and hopefully be much better for it in future, I think 10 months is fair but would not have disagreed with a 12 month ban either. He is a top class rider and no doubt when he returns he will be scoring big points wherever he is. Edited February 27, 2015 by whoswinnin86 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Absolutely no chance. They are more deluded than ever. Some now think the 10 month ban 'proves' that the test was faulty and he wasn't guilty.. they believe that he would have been banned for 2 years otherwise and it's only 10 months or they have 'their arses sued off'. some classics on there. Someone suggested he go to race in California My personal favourite is "devastated. things will never be the same again" 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theknow 2 Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 some classics on there. Someone suggested he go to race in California My personal favourite is "devastated. things will never be the same again" It would appear there are some people with no common sense and the iq of a horse chestnut. Yes indeed most of the DW fan club 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) Just re-read the FIM statement, which is only concerned with the offence and the punishment, rather than any 'reasoning' behind it!! That is still to come in a later FIM statement. There must be some factual reasoning as to why the ban was 10 months, rather than the max of 2 years?! Await with interest....................... Edited February 27, 2015 by Skidder1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post waiheke1 Posted February 27, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Its common knowledge that the reason they handed out only 10 months was because they failed to take bloods, had an off duty policeman perform the test, took more than seven days to make a decision and are worried about how much compensation they will have to pay when one of middlos lawyer friends sues them. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Its common knowledge that the reason they handed out only 10 months was because they failed to take bloods, had an off duty policeman perform the test, took more than seven days to make a decision and are worried about how much compensation they will have to pay when one of middlos lawyer friends sues them. And if you question that, you will be asked 'What speedway qualifications you hold' and informed that unless you are a fan of 50 years you can't possibly judge lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) Has Muddlo made any utterances yet? Or has someone gagged him and superglued his tweeting fingers together? Edited February 27, 2015 by Star Lady 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 And if you question that, you will be asked 'What speedway qualifications you hold' and informed that unless you are a fan of 50 years you can't possibly judge lol. #anotherpoolehater 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Has Muddlo made any utterances yet? Or has someone gagged him and superglued his tweeting fingers together? He's been very quiet since Tuesday. However the good news is that @Kelvin_Tatum has just joined twitter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Well now decision is in I hope Darcy has finally learnt his lesson and hopefully be much better for it in future, I think 10 months is fair but would not have disagreed with a 12 month ban either. He is a top class rider and no doubt when he returns he will be scoring big points wherever he is. That's the puzzle only Ward can figure out, his scrapes with the law, be it on track or off, haven't taught him anything so far it would appear, so all we can do is hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 The Berwick one was when he had Rymel, Makovsky and Franc all in on 9.00 assessed averages and wanted to bring Bentley in once their averages had gone down. As Bentley was in their previous years final 1-7 this rule was used to stop him coming in. Totally different circs with Ward, but will be interesting to see what happens. If their rumoured introduction of Gomolski on a low average comes to pass, one would imagine him having boosted it by the end of June which may cause difficulties for Poole. That's the case. It was thought that it was a bit stagemanaged at the time, and too obvious it was Bentley in the wings ready to rejoin the team again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) Just re-read the FIM statement, which is only concerned with the offence and the punishment, rather than any 'reasoning' behind it!! That is still to come in a later FIM statement. There must be some factual reasoning as to why the ban was 10 months, rather than the max of 2 years?! Await with interest ....................... If an offence has a maximum punishment then it also has a minimum factor? I am sure if you did a check of FIM criteria in this respect you will find the answer - how do you expect BSF members to know - they only drivel and speculate! Here's the 'speedway magic' of Darcy Ward and why the sport needs him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0QMVP-7zEY&app=desktop Edited February 27, 2015 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.